Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Rolepgeek]

When innocence is no security, there is no incentive to be innocent.

Further, I believe that not arresting literally everyone who comes back and locking them away will actually decrease the amount of terrorism. It's called complementary behavior. Yes, some people will still end up being able to get away with it. That's why I think they should be monitored, spoke to and helped to have a place in society.

Some will still be fanatics, but the proportion of people who are true fanatics versus people who turn to crime and holy war as a way to try and feel meaning in their lives and strike back against a society they feel has abandoned them (regardless of whether it's true; if your family car gets vandalized multiple times a month and ethnic slurs get carved into your door, and you're a dumbass teenager with no sense of scale and hormones raging, you can make some incredibly bad decisions) is, as far as I can tell, a lot smaller than some people think.

But I think that locking up everyone who comes back will contribute to that sense of exclusion, frustration, and resentment. No, we don't want to 'just live with terrorism', and I think more than one approach will be necessary, but honestly, look at Aarhus. They took up a similar strategy, and the number of people leaving each year to go to Syria dropped from around 30 in 2013 to 1 in 2014. Doesn't work perfectly, but preventative measures, overall, tend to work better than reactionary measures for most things. Health, crime, whatever. Easier to prevent a problem than solve it.

I do agree with you on the crime thing save that rather than expanding death penalty, I feel like social programs and rehabilitation should be expanded to prevent shit from happening in first place. But again, this might be a matter of the differences between America and Europe, where America has imprisoned the largest portion of it's population of anywhere in the world, whilst still having fewer police officers per capita than most of Europe, like a third less, largely due to mandatory sentencing requirements and war on drugs.

This is europe thread, though, so I suppose I'll just ask: How common are repeat offenders? Because the thing I most remember about scandinavian justice system is that there was that breach in prison security when doors were left unlocked and the prisoners used it to bake a cake, because they didn't see a reason to try to escape or whatever.

@Martinuzz: Non-muslim people go to Syria to do volunteer work in refugee camps. Muslims can't? They would have no reason to see it as helping their fellow muslims? No way of thinking of that as a holy calling? Mujahideen doesn't just mean warrior, nor does Jihad (now) only mean war. Teenagers can, and often are, stupid. That includes running off to a foreign land because you think you can help people, as well as running off to a foreign land because you think you can 'defend the faith'. I don't think retributive justice, as in justice meant purely to punish and avenge, is something we should strive for. Meant to disincentivize, prevent, and stop behavior, sure. But locking everyone up, or killing them, gets real bad real fast. Cost, PR, and effectiveness all suffer.

[martinuzz]

But I don't want to see them punished for going to Syria. It has nothing to do with punishment or avenging. I just want to protect society against them.

@Martinuzz: Non-muslim people go to Syria to do volunteer work in refugee camps. Muslims can't?

Sure they can. Let them sign up for the red half moon, or any other UN certified aid organistation needing volunteers badly, and I'm perfectly fine with that. But drive off in your car to the Turkish border and claim afterwards that you just went to help people? Sorry, can't take the risk of believing that.

[smjjames]

But I don't want to see them punished for going to Syria. It has nothing to do with punishment or avenging. I just want to protect society against them.

Except that imprisioning everybody that even set foot in Syria is going to get loads of those that went there for completely non-terrorist reasons. It's like fishing with a massive net, sure, you'll catch lots of what you do want, but you'll also catch lots of things that you didn't intend to catch.

[martinuzz]

Except that imprisioning everybody that even set foot in Syria is going to get loads of those that went there for completely non-terrorist reasons. It's like fishing with a massive net, sure, you'll catch lots of what you do want, but you'll also catch lots of things that you didn't intend to catch.

There are no 'loads of those that went there for non-terrorist reasons'. There's maybe a few very dumb dumbasses that think it's safe to go and help kids in camps in Syria, but the vast majority of western born muslims travelling into Syria, go there with full intent to aid IS, and even those few who went there to help and not to fight will be unable to prevent getting involved in armed conflict. At least that's what our Dutch intelligence service reports, on whose advise all who return from Syria are detained, at least for questioning. They (the intelligence agency AIVD) are pushing hard to extend this to children from age 11, since that's the age that IS sends boys to camps to start training to shoot and decapitate, but that's not going to happen.

Just last week a dutch woman returned after a few years in Syria. She claimed to have been kidnapped to Syria by her husband, and managed to escape to Peshmerga forces after a few years, with her two kids. The woman is still in detention, the children have been placed in foster care upon arriving in the Netherlands.

[smjjames]

Also, it's Red Crescent, not Half Moon.

[martinuzz]

Also, it's Red Crescent, not Half Moon.

Oops. That's what I get for making a literal translation of the Dutch term

[Erkki]

I would say that the recent amount of terror attacks perpetrated with knives/machetes is a very good sign that gun control is a good thing.

I thought the gun lobby said that terrorists and criminals would always get access to guns anyway.

Those people would have made an order of magnitude more casualties if they had easy access to guns.

I do think some control is necessary(current levels generally speaking are IMHO sufficient), but terrorists and criminals do always have access to weapons. Guns or explosives. Whats an entirely different thing is whether they want to just become martyrs like this last last fellow with a knife who targeted police officers, or if they want to kill as many as possible like some others have. As you can see from guys like Breivik and many jihadis, terrorists tend to not be sharpest of minds.

Either way, one can buy a shotgun for just ID card in many EU countries, so theres always that option. Or like the Paris attackers they can acquire a full auto rifles illegally in a couple of phone calls. Its so sad the Commission isn't interested in chasing criminals but rather blames hundreds of thousands hobbyists and legal gun owners. I'm still waiting for the first terrorist attack where the firearms used were of typical civilian types and/or legally acquired.

[smjjames]

I would say that the recent amount of terror attacks perpetrated with knives/machetes is a very good sign that gun control is a good thing.

I thought the gun lobby said that terrorists and criminals would always get access to guns anyway.

Those people would have made an order of magnitude more casualties if they had easy access to guns.

I do think some control is necessary(current levels generally speaking are IMHO sufficient), but terrorists and criminals do always have access to weapons. Guns or explosives. Whats an entirely different thing is whether they want to just become martyrs like this last last fellow with a knife who targeted police officers, or if they want to kill as many as possible like some others have. As you can see from guys like Breivik and many jihadis, terrorists tend to not be sharpest of minds.

Either way, one can buy a shotgun for just ID card in many EU countries, so theres always that option. Or like the Paris attackers they can acquire a full auto rifles illegally in a couple of phone calls. Its so sad the Commission isn't interested in chasing criminals but rather blames hundreds of thousands hobbyists and legal gun owners. I'm still waiting for the first terrorist attack where the firearms used were of typical civilian types and/or legally acquired.

Except that typical civillian firearms aren't the ones which hold hundreds of rounds a clip.

[Erkki]

I would say that the recent amount of terror attacks perpetrated with knives/machetes is a very good sign that gun control is a good thing.

I thought the gun lobby said that terrorists and criminals would always get access to guns anyway.

Those people would have made an order of magnitude more casualties if they had easy access to guns.

I do think some control is necessary(current levels generally speaking are IMHO sufficient), but terrorists and criminals do always have access to weapons. Guns or explosives. Whats an entirely different thing is whether they want to just become martyrs like this last last fellow with a knife who targeted police officers, or if they want to kill as many as possible like some others have. As you can see from guys like Breivik and many jihadis, terrorists tend to not be sharpest of minds.

Either way, one can buy a shotgun for just ID card in many EU countries, so theres always that option. Or like the Paris attackers they can acquire a full auto rifles illegally in a couple of phone calls. Its so sad the Commission isn't interested in chasing criminals but rather blames hundreds of thousands hobbyists and legal gun owners. I'm still waiting for the first terrorist attack where the firearms used were of typical civilian types and/or legally acquired.

Except that typical civillian firearms aren't the ones which hold hundreds of rounds a clip.

Exactly. Except that most semi-auto rifles do, but you don't see terrorists using 4000 € sporting rifles do you? 

[Loud Whispers]

I'd say the recent amount of terror attacks perpetrated is a very good sign that border control is a good thing.

Wait, how the fuck did we go back to guns AGAIN?
Surely I'm not the only European tired of constant American-style gun arguments?
At least give it its own thread. Because it's been done to death here.

Tbh it isn't full American yet, not even close

I can't even taste any sarcastic

*EDIT

It's at times like this I begin to understand LW's shitposting. He's just given up, I think.

Hahaha pretty much
We're all too late to do much more than damage control, so the best we can do is damage control and bants

[Azkul]

I would say that the recent amount of terror attacks perpetrated with knives/machetes is a very good sign that gun control is a good thing.

I thought the gun lobby said that terrorists and criminals would always get access to guns anyway.

Those people would have made an order of magnitude more casualties if they had easy access to guns.

I do think some control is necessary(current levels generally speaking are IMHO sufficient), but terrorists and criminals do always have access to weapons. Guns or explosives. Whats an entirely different thing is whether they want to just become martyrs like this last last fellow with a knife who targeted police officers, or if they want to kill as many as possible like some others have. As you can see from guys like Breivik and many jihadis, terrorists tend to not be sharpest of minds.

Either way, one can buy a shotgun for just ID card in many EU countries, so theres always that option. Or like the Paris attackers they can acquire a full auto rifles illegally in a couple of phone calls. Its so sad the Commission isn't interested in chasing criminals but rather blames hundreds of thousands hobbyists and legal gun owners. I'm still waiting for the first terrorist attack where the firearms used were of typical civilian types and/or legally acquired.

Except that typical civillian firearms aren't the ones which hold hundreds of rounds a clip.

Hundreds of rounds?

[scriver]

I feel like social programs and rehabilitation should be expanded to prevent shit from happening in first place.

I need to pick this out of the post because duh, of course, everybody would like that to be the case. But then you have to acknowledge that Sweden is the (or at least was at some point during the last year, don't know if the statistics are stills standing) the second largest contributor of ISIS volounteers per capita in Europe. Sweden is also one of the providers of the largest amounts of social services and rehabilitation programs. It didn't stop all of those people. This isn't a problem that can be fought in such ways.

[Orange Wizard]

The only solution I can see is eradicating any branch of Islam (or any ideology, really) that encourages murder and terrorism.

It's going to piss off all the freedom of speech people but there really has to be some point where society as a whole can say "enough is enough".

[Egan_BW]

Ohh! Can we ban all religion while we're at it?!

[Orange Wizard]

Most religions don't offer salvation in exchange for slaughtering the infidel